What is said about Rafale’s proposal is that in involves cooperation to the “science” level, gathering universities and technological centers, while Boeing and SAAB only talk about transfer at the industry level. News on the last month waved that the french were willing to share technology not only on the aircraft but also on weaponry. I don’t know if it’s official or not, but that could make a hell of difference.
All of them are playing dirty, but Boeing’s misleading allegations are the only ones that are bothering the MoD, because it allows journalists and politicians to contest the current directives of the MoD it they opt for the french route. I’m saying that in relation to the “let’s criticize US rampage” that Sintra mentioned, because the way he said it looks like his acts (the MoD) are for free, while in fact they have a reason (being it a valid one or not).
As for SAAB I wouldn’t say it has the weakest case. It’s the cheapest of them all in the end. And while its ToT is on the same level as the Hornet’s, the fact of being a work in progress is a little advantage here IMO, because it provides a better way of learning (while you do).
As a plus, from a commercial point of view, all of the 3 will grant the right to Brazil to sell the selected plane to other South American countries, but IMO the Gripen is the only one who is cheaper enough to have a real chance in that market.

Could be ok at-least they share some engine components/weapons.

May be because they do not need more ‘heavy’ fighters. The choice of the Sukhoi was rather strange in my opinion they could have easily gone for Super Hornet.

Why the Super Hornet doesn’t qualify as ‘Heavy’?

Worst looking I think are the Hawker Siddeley Bucaneers. That thing doesn’t look airworthy in my eyes. Along the same line comes the soviet Tu-22 Blinder.
I am one of the few people in the world to find the Eurofighter Typhoon beautiful though. In fact most of the new fighter designs look good.
(Edit: a good exception is the F-35. I can’t stand that thing.)
Best of all time for me would be the Mirage 4000 though.

Can anyone envisage Rafale getting the initial fighter order (& maybe the used F1 for the navy), & Gripen NG being selected as the follow-up to replace the AMX?

I very much doubt it. One of the objectives is to produce the aircraft here (or at least a big chunk of it). Option for a single design optimizes the “economy scale” (economia de escala, not sure how to translate that, does that make sense?)

The one from Selex. The Gripen field trials will only start next year. The MRCA decision will only be taken by about late 2010 or early 2011 and that means the first jet has to be delivered by 2014 in all probablity so Gripen NG is well on scheduule for that. When will Brazil need its fighters ?

I think the schedule points out to circa 2014/15. That’s when the M-2000s are expected to be retired.
I think the only thing in favour of the Gripen now is the low cost. It’s not so mush the cost of acquisition, but that of maintenance. Some people fear that with future governments may restrain the budget of the armed forces again, making the low cost Gripen easier to maintain in the air. After all, how good is a capable aicraft if you can’t keep it in the air? Also FAB had good impressions from the swedish teams in the cooperation to develop the R-99.

I’m sure a Brazilian poster could provide more info on this,
but AFAIK the Brazilian Navy has been trying to develop a nuclear sub for some time, so it’s hardly a stretch or a new project out of the blue. I have NEVER seen any talk of France transferring naval reactor technology: Brazil has already been developing it for this exact purpose. But indeed, the size of the ship they’re talking about just re-inforces what a stupid idea it is.

Personally, it seems absurd when long endurance AIP is available (DCNS’ next-gen MESMA looks great and current gen supposedly offers 21+ days submerged), and could even be extended by developing a “silent-refuelable at sea” operational protocol.
But the admirals want their nuclear sub :confused:

The future Nuclear Sub will not be a “Scorpene type”. It’s meant to displace around 6000 tons which is a bit larger than French Rubys/Amethiste design. It will be a new design specifically to house the Brazilian made reactor whose prototype is said to be already working at Navy’s center ARAMAR. The project for a Nuc Sub exist from 1978 and was halted several times by lack of funds. The Navy continued to invest in it on their own albeit slowly. Now there is a government commitment to assure the funds needed to continue the research for the next years. The plan to purchase a hull from the French is a way to skip stages and regain part of the time lost. BTW the contract emcompasses not only the technology of construction but also that of DESIGN of submarines which is an ambitionous(?) step in the direction of allowing Brazil to design and build its own submarines, nuclear and conventional in the future.
As for AIP, the new END (National Defense Strategy) points to ways of developing the National industry of defense but also spilling the benefits to the civilian society in ways of technology and scientific improvement. I can think of many uses for nuclear tech, from energy production to medicine aplication, but no use for AIP other than moving a Sub longer below the water.
I hope everything I wrote made sense, I tried the best with the limited time I have and my english skills. 🙂

Yes they can keep pilots trained in CATOBAR ops, but only if their ship actually gets to sea once every now and then.

Regarding harriers, it depends on what model you compare them to, for example the FA.2 (now retired except for units in storage) and AV-8B+ both have BVR Missile capabilities that the A4 does not match.

A hypothetical FA.3 (GR.9 with Blue Vixen) probably wouldn’t be too hard to develop and would completely outclass Upgraded A4’s while not having the Hot and High performance problems that led to the demise of the FA.2.

A-4 is expected to have BVR capability with Grifo Radar and Derby missiles. It may no be on par with the Harriers, but as I said, it will not lack much and will probably be better bang for the buck. I understand Brazilian Navy already made the option for the CTOL route, the A-4s are just a temporary solution until a new plane and ship are chosen (if ever).

Except there aren’t Harriers for sale, & Brazil can’t buy F-35B yet, & maybe not ever.

Exactly. Going Harrier means a temporary solution aswell as only used planes are available. The long term solution would be the F-35B and there are no concrete probabilities that it will be available in near or mid-term future.

Going Harrier and STOVL would mean discarding all the carrier doctrine and training and starting from scratch with the crew. Brazil will probably keep with the CTOL route. Rumors around here talk about an offer from the French of a CDG type with conventional propulsion. Not unlikely as they have shown interest in getting another carrier themselves.
As for the S2T, word is that the Navy is acquiring/refitting 5 units: 3 for AEW, 1 for COD and 1 Tanker.